Sallust's Melian Dialogue: Sulla and Bocchus in the Bellum Iugurthinum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sallust’s Melian Dialogue: Sulla and Bocchus in the Bellum Iugurthinum Cet article se propose d’étudier attentivement les rencontres qui eurent lieu entre Sylla, alors questeur, et Bocchus, régent de Mauritanie, telles que rapportées dans le Bellum Iugurthinum de Salluste. Suivant l’hypothèse du dialogue mélien de Thucydide qui aurait servi de référence pour ces trois épisodes, Salluste se lance dans une diatribe contre l’impérialisme romain qui jette un éclairage unique sur la perception négative de l’expansion romaine qu’entretenaient les peuples à l’extérieur de l’empire. L’idée principale de cet article consiste à dire qu’en écrivant sur les rencontres entre Sylla et Bocchus, Salluste se permet d’insister sur un récit historique qui exprime un point de vue opposé à la vision du monde pro-romaine qui était alors omniprésente dans le discours politique à Rome.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".